LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. 
Shelf A- ■ 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 



THE INTERPRETER 



WITH 



HIS BIBLE 




A/ E. u WAFFLE, A.M., 
if 

AUTHOR OF "THE LORD'S DAY " (PRIZE ESSAY), 
SERVANT AND HIS LORD," ETC., ETC. 




NEW YORK: 
ANSON D. F. RANDOLPH & COMPANY, 

38 WEST TWENTY-THIRD STREET. 



V 






\ 



v 



$5476 
•W3 



Copyright, 1891, by 
Anson D. F. Randolph & Company. 



EDWARD O. JENKINS SON, 

Printer, Stereotyper, and Elertrotyfier, 
20 North William St., New York. 



en 

A 



CONTENTS. 



PAGB 

Introduction, 5 

CHAPTER I. 
The Interpreter Himself, - - - - 15 

CHAPTER II. 
General Principles of Interpretation, - 40 

CHAPTER III. 

The Interpretation of Figurative Lan- 
guage, -------80 



INTRODUCTION. 



The purpose of this manual is to help students 
of the Bible to ascertain its true meaning. It 
makes no special claim to learning or originality. 
Most of the suggestions and rules herein given 
may be found in the works on Hermeneutics. But 
those works are usually so voluminous as to make 
them of little value to the ordinary Bible-student. 
This book is intended to meet the wants of per- 
sons who are anxious to study the Bible for them- 
selves, but who have not had the advantages of a 
classical education. This class of persons is con- 
stantly increasing. There has never been so 
much Bible-study as there is at the present time. 
In all our churches are young people who desire 
to know the Word. It is a good sign. There 
can be no better work than to stimulate and 
direct aright this study. Our present efficiency 
and our hope for the future are determined by 
our knowledge of the Word, and our willingness 
to obey its precepts. Any help should be wel- 

(5) 



6 Introduction. 

corned in this important study. The rules of in- 
terpretation here stated and illustrated should be 
followed by all students of the Bible. They are 
as necessary to the minister and the theological 
professor as to the uneducated young man just 
beginning to study his Bible. But the latter is 
not so likely to know them. 

No space can be given here to a discussion of 
the value of the Bible to mankind ; though a vol- 
ume might be written on that subject. Only a 
few words can be said with reference to its in- 
spiration. It might be as well to take its inspira- 
tion for granted, since few will study the Bible 
except those who believe that it is God's Word. 
But so much doubt on this subject has been cre- 
ated by infidels, and by certain kinds of " higher 
criticism," that it may be desirable at this point 
to glance briefly at the proofs of inspiration. 

I. The Divine Inspiration of the Bible is proved 
by the claims of its authors considered in connec- 
tion with their moral purpose. Its writers and 
the speakers whose addresses are reported con- 
tinually assert that they are the messengers and 
mouthpieces of the Lord. "Thus saith the 
Lord " is the usual preface of what we find in 
the Old Testament. The apostles made the same 



Introduction. 7 

claim for themselves, declaring that Jesus had 
promised them the Holy Spirit who should 
" guide them into all truth " (John xvi. 13). That 
all these authors were deceived is hardly credi- 
ble in view of their clear and profound thought. 
To say that they were conscious deceivers is 
utterly absurd in view of the lofty moral tone 
which pervades all their writings. We must al- 
low their claim unless it can be disproved. 

II. The Divine Inspiration of the Bible is 
proved by its remarkable unity. It was written 
by about forty different authors and its composi- 
tion extended over some fifteen hundred years. 
If it had been composed by uninspired men, it 
would be full of jarring opinions. But, in fact, it 
is one harmonious whole. We discover in it the 
progressive development of redemption, but no 
contradiction in its essential doctrines. There is 
diversity of expression, but unity of sentiment 
In the circumstances, this could hardly be, if the 
Bible had not been inspired by one Person. 

III. The inspiration of the Bible is proved by 
the fulfillment of prophecy. Events are de- 
scribed, in detail, before their occurrence. Two 
sets of prophecies are especially noticeable in this 
respect. One set consists of the prophecies relat- 



8 Introduction. 

ing to the Jews. If any one will turn to the 28th 
chapter of Deuteronomy, read it and compare its 
prophecies with the subsequent history of the 
Jews, he can hardly doubt that he has read in- 
spired words. Other prophecies, similar in their 
minuteness, relate to Christ. Examples are, Isaiah 
liii.; Micah v. 11; and Malachi iii. 1, 2. Many 
such might be given. Their details show them 
to be more than general expressions of hope that 
a Messiah would come. Who but God can know 
and describe events before they occur ? 

IV. The inspiration of the Bible is proved by 
its elevation of tone compared with that of con- 
temporary writings by men who did not claim to 
be inspired. Take the New Testament books 
and compare them with the writings of the period 
immediately following the Apostolic. There is a 
great gap between the two. In elevation of 
thought, in moral tone, in spiritual insight, in 
terseness and vigor of expression, in definiteness 
and certainty of statement, the New Testament 
writings are infinitely superior to those of the 
next century. If the former had not been in- 
spired, there should have been progress instead 
of such marked deterioration. 

V. The divine origin of the Bible is proved by 



Introduction. 9 

the fact that it presents ideas different from those 
contained in any other book. Its representations 
of God could never have been conceived of by 
uninspired men. Its descriptions of man, of his 
depravity, of his need of re-creation, of his con- 
demnation under a righteous law, are too un- 
flattering to have been composed by men about 
themselves. This is not only true concerning 
man in general, but the sins and crimes of its 
heroes are displayed in all their deformity on the 
pages of the Bible. Other books try to make 
their heroes perfect. And the way of redemption 
is something which men would never have in- 
vented for themselves. The whole plan is un- 
reasonable and repulsive to the sinful and unre- 
generate heart. If the Bible were a man-made 
book, its ideas would be more in conformity with 
those which we find men generally entertaining. 
No one can read the Bible without Reeling that 
it contains more than the products of human 
thought. 

YE. The inspiration of the Bible is proved by 
its effects on individuals and communities. Men 
and women are convicted of sin and led to exer- 
cise repentance and faith by reading its words. 
Other books may give their readers a moral im- 



10 Introduction. 

pulse ; the Bible completely changes them in 
heart and life. Those nations whose people have 
known and studied the Bible, are greatly superior 
to those whose character has been formed by the 
doctrines of uninspired men. To see the force of 
this, compare the morals and civilization of Eng- 
land or the United States with those of China or 
India. 

Other proofs could be given, but these are 
enough to convince any one who is open to con- 
viction that the Bible is the "Word of God. 

The inspiration of the Bible creates a difficulty 
in its interpretation. We naturally stand in awe 
of that which has come from the Lord. We 
think that what He has said must be so profound 
that no man can understand it. Of course, this 
is true in the sense that no man can comprehend 
all its meaning. But a revelation which cannot 
be understood is no revelation ; it is simply a 
mystery or puzzle. In His communication to us, 
it must be God's purpose that we should under- 
stand Him. When men write, they try to express 
themselves in such a way that their readers can 
apprehend their meaning. They want to be 
understood. Otherwise, why should they write at 
all ? The very purpose of a revelation is to con- 



Introduction. 11 

vey information — to dispel darkness and give 
light. To say that God has inspired a book which 
we cannot understand, is to charge Him with 
being such a poor author that He has de- 
feated His own purpose. The Bible was certainly 
meant to be understood. If it is not the clearest 
of books, it is not God's book. Obscurity is not 
generally regarded as a good quality in an author. 
God is the best of authors, and therefore the 
clearest. He has done the most that divine skill 
can do to present His facts and ideas in such a 
way that we can grasp them. We attribute to 
the incomprehensibility of the divine what is due 
to our own ignorance of the things necessary to 
enable us to understand the Bible. 

Can common people understand it ? Of course, 
we need the help of scholars and of those 
who are habitual students of the Bible. Such 
help is of inestimable value. We need their help 
not because the thoughts of the Bible are ob- 
scurely expressed, but because it was written in 
languages and times unfamiliar to most of us. 
These obstacles to the understanding of it can 
be removed only by scholars. But when once 
we have the Bible in our own tongue, and the 
facts which give peculiar form to its expres- 



12 Introduction. 

sions are known, it is easy enough to understand 
it. 

Of course, the ignorant and undisciplined will 
misinterpret some parts of it. They would do 
the same with any book to which they felt bound 
to give some meaning. They will misinterpret 
the simplest statements that ever fell from human 
lips or were ever stamped upon the printed page. 
Every teacher and preacher has had sad experi- 
ence of this fact. That such persons make 
wretched work of interpreting the Bible is no re- 
flection upon its simplicity and clearness. 

It is not meant that the Bible can be under- 
stood without study. Its thoughts are too great 
to admit of easy comprehension. But that is no 
excuse for misunderstanding it. Neither does it 
justify the assertion that only a special class of 
men can rightly interpret it. The Bible is for 
the people. All should read and study it for 
themselves. While they should get all the help 
they can from scholars, they should accept' no 
man's interpretation until it is verified by their 
own study. In that study they need the guid- 
ance of principles and rules of interpretation. 
This manual is intended to show how persons of 
ordinary gifts and intelligence can ascertain the 



Introduction. 13 

meaning of all its essential parts. It is hoped 
that it will be especially helpful to young Chris- 
tians, who desire to know and appropriate the 
treasures of the inspired Word. 



THE 

INTERPRETER WITH HIS BIBLE. 



CHAPTER I. 

The Inteepeetee Himself. 

Much bad interpreting of Scripture is due to 
the unfitness of the interpreter for the work 
which he has assumed. Moral character and 
mental attainments determine one's ability to 
understand the Bible as truly as they affect 
his success in any other line of effort. Be- 
cause the Bible is easy to be understood, it 
does not follow that every one will get from it 
the right meaning. And yet, every intelligent 
person may do so if he will take the right course. 
The difficulties of interpretation are mostly sub- 
jective. They are more in the interpreter than 
in the book which is to be interpreted. They 
arise from both moral and intellectual unfitness. 

The former is more important than the latter, 

(15) 



16 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

since fhe Bible deals mainly with moral and re- 
ligious subjects. We will consider — 

I. THE MOEAL ATTITUDE OF THE INTERPRETER. 

If one would be a good interpreter, he must 
love the truth. He must have a strong desire 
to know exactly what God has said on the sub- 
jects discussed in the Bible. He must be inter- 
ested in that class of topics. He must be a 
seeker after the truth. He must have the same 
intense desire to ascertain the facts of religion as 
God has revealed them, as the earnest scientist 
has to discover the facts and laws of nature. 
He must ask, not with the sneering skepticism 
of a Pilate, but with the earnest feeling of a 
true seeker, What is truth ? He must love the 
truth more than he loves his own prejudices, or 
his own will and way. He must love the truth 
enough to obey it when it is discovered. He 
must not study the Bible to fortify himself in 
his prejudices or in disobedience. One having 
this spirit will be governed in his study of the 
Bible by three important rules of interpreta- 
tion. 

1. "Let the Bible mean what it wants to 



The Interpreter Himself. 17 

mean? — We must not twist or distort it, in 
order that it may fit our preconceived theories. 
We must not come to it with opinions of our 
own and insist that it shall confirm them. We 
must not read into the Bible what is not there 
because we want it to say certain things. 

This rule, so simple, so just, so axiomatic, is 
the one most frequently violated. It is doubt- 
ful whether an interpreter ever lived who always 
followed it; and the great majority violate it 
whenever it suits their convenience. Perfect 
observance of it may not be possible, but we 
must keep it constantly in mind, if we would 
understand God's message to us, and not make 
the pages of His book reflect our own ideas. 

A few illustrations will show how this rule is 
violated. A man adopts the theory that there 
have never been and never will be any manifesta- 
tions of the Supernatural in human life. His 
theory is expressed in the curt sentence of Mat- 
thew Arnold, " Miracles do not happen." To 
him every Bible story which relates a miracu- 
lous event is a myth. It is capable of some ra- 
tionalistic explanation, and it is the business of 
the " higher criticism " to discover the truth or 



18 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

fact which has been thus overlaid with the pro- 
ducts of the " Oriental imagination." He thus 
explains the accounts of the Crossing of the Red 
Sea (Gen. xiv.), of the Capture of Jericho 
(Joshua vi.), of Elijah on Carmel (1 Kings xviii.), 
of Jonah and the Whale (Jonah i.), of the Birth, 
Miracles, and Resurrection of Jesus, of the Con- 
version of Paul, and of every such event. Such 
a man will take nothing as it reads if it relates 
to the Supernatural. He will make sentences 
and words mean exactly the opposite of what 
they naturally mean rather than abandon his 
theory. He cannot interpret; he is trying to 
make a Bible of his own. A little common- 
sense would show him that he must choose be- 
tween his theory and the Bible, and give up one 
or the other. 

A man adopts the theory that all souls will be 
saved. When he comes to those passages (Matt. 
xxv. 41, 46; 2 Thes. i. 7; John v. 28, and many 
others) which declare that the wicked shall be 
punished with everlasting destruction, he does 
not take them as they read, but exerts his in- 
genuity to make them mean something else. 
Whether one believes in conditional immortal- 



The Interpreter Himself. 19 

ity, or believes that all souls are necessarily im- 
mortal, he may hold his theory in such a way as 
to unfit him to interpret fairly those passages in 
which the words " die," " perish," and " are de- 
stroyed," as applied to the impenitent wicked, 
occur (Rom. vi. 23; James i. 15; Matt. xxv. 41, 
46; 2 Thes. i. 9; 2 Peter ii. 12. and others). One 
may have such a theory of the New Birth and 
of Christian perseverance as to affect unfavorably 
his interpretation of such passages as Heb. vi. 
4-8, x. 26-29, and John xv. 2, 6. The man who 
has formed a prejudice against the doctrine of 
election, will treat unfairly such passages as 
John xv. 16; Rom. viii. 29, ix. 10-15; Eph. i. 
4-6; 1 Peter i. 2.* 

We are especially likely to fall into this 
error when we are studying those passages which 
relate to the organization and ordinances of a 
Christian church. Our denominational preju- 
dices are almost certain to warp our interpreta- 

* It should not be inferred that the author is either ad- 
vocating or opposing disputed doctrines because he re- 
fers to them by way of illustration. In some cases, to 
illustrate a rule or principle of interpretation, he shows 
that a certain doctrine cannot be found in the passage 
under consideration ; but that leaves its advocates free to 
find it in other passages, if they can. 



20 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

tions. We come to the Bible determined that 
it shall be on our side and confirm our doctrines 
and practices. We omit, inject, distort, twist, 
do everything except let the Bible mean what it 
wants to mean. Many examples of this could 
be given, but they must be omitted lest the 
author should be charged with denominational 
bias. They would be amusing if they were not 
such sad illustrations of our readiness to pervert 
the Scriptures for our own purposes. 

No labored argument is needed to show the dis- 
honesty and folly of this course. It is not ex- 
egesis, it is not interpretation, it is the sin of 
Balaam, who tried to make God speak what he 
wanted Him to, though all the time he knew 
God's will. It is shameful disloyalty to Him 
who has condescended to teach us. Some of it 
is due to human weakness ; we cannot rid our- 
selves of our prejudices ; more of it is due to 
human perversity. We cannot hope to under- 
stand the Bible until we are willing to let it 
mean what it wants to mean. 

When one comes to the study of any part of 
Scripture, he should ask himself such ques- 
tions as these : " Am I honestly seeking to find 



The Interpreter Himself. 21 

out the real meaning of this passage? Am I 
willing to let God speak His mind, or am I try- 
ing to make Him speak my mind ? Can I let 
this passage mean what it wants to mean ? Am 
I willing to accept a meaning that will go against 
my prejudices and theories, if I have formed 
any ? " On one's answer to these questions will 
depend his ability and trustworthiness as an in- 
terpreter. If he is loyal to his Lord and honest 
with himself, he will not pretend to interpret 
when he is trying to distort. If he would try 
always to have this attitude of mind, we might 
soon rise above even our unconscious prejudices, 
and be able really to interpret God's word and 
learn His will. 

2. Study the Bible with an obedient spirit. 
— This is not simply a rule of life ; it is also a 
rule of interpretation. Jesus said : " If any man 
will do His will he shall know of the doctrine, 
whether it be of God." One must love the 
truth and hold himself subject to it, if he would 
learn the truth. Nothing blinds the understand- 
ing and warps the judgment like a perverse will. 
When men are determined to do wrong, they 
can usually persuade themselves that wrong is 



22 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

right. It is doubtful whether there has ever 
been an error that has not had its honest advo- 
cates. When men will not obey the truth which 
is offered them, they are given over to believe 
a lie. A sort of moral blindness falls upon them 
and they lose any capacity they may have had 
to perceive the truth. Of course, this blindness 
exists in varying degrees, just as men obey the 
truth they know with greater or less faithfulness. 
But no man can rightly interpret the Bible un- 
less he comes to it with an obedient spirit. A 
film will be formed over his eyes by any lurk- 
ing purpose in his heart not to obey its precepts, 
if they should happen to cross purposes he has 
already formed. 

This law is not arbitrary ; it is a law of the 
human mind. Christ's saying does not mean 
that the obedient man will have the truth mirac- 
ulously revealed to him. He means that an 
obedient spirit is a necessary condition of know- 
ing the truth. There is a sort of sympathy 
which one must have with the truth in order to 
know it. We must love the beautiful and have 
a cultivated taste in order to appreciate works of 
art. We must love a man if we would really 



The Interpreter Himself. 23 

know the best that is in him. In some such way 
the organ of spiritual knowledge is an obedient 
spirit, which proceeds from love of the truth. 

For example, suppose an unregenerate man 
begins the study of the Bible. He does not go 
far before he finds that he is commanded to re- 
pent and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. He 
realizes that to obey will involve a complete 
change in his life. If he obeys he will find that 
God has other truth for him which He will make 
plain. If he disobeys, he cannot expect to in- 
terpret aright any portion of Scripture beyond 
this precept. Simple matters of fact — truth such 
as the intellect can apprehend— he may under- 
stand ; but he will have no power to discern the 
spiritual. " The natural man receiveth not the 
things of the Spirit of God ; . . . . neither can 
he know them, for they are spiritually discern- 
ed " (ICor. ii. 14). 

This law applies with equal force to the 
Christian. If he will not do the truth, he shall 
not know the truth. Men have found in the 
Bible justification for war, polygamy, slavery, 
and other social evils because they wanted to 
practice them. Worldly amusements, the use of 



24 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

intoxicants, alliance with men of the world, de- 
votion to fashion, Sabbath-breaking, and kindred 
habits, lead to many false interpretations of 
Scripture. Those who do such things want the 
Bible on their side, and will misinterpret what- 
ever condemns their habits. And the worst of 
such perversions is, that those who indulge in 
them come, after a time, to believe that they are 
true interpretations. They lose their capacity 
to know the truth. 

One may see the same thing in ecclesiastical 
relations. Said a Christian lady of one of the 
denominations concerning the doctrines of an- 
other, " If they are right I don't want to know 
it." She voiced a common sentiment. "Let 
me remain in error, if knowing the truth will 
compel me to do disagreeable duties," say many. 
In that spirit they will put any construction 
upon Scripture rather than obey the truth. 
They thus lose all fitness to be interpreters. 

We should not expect to discover the real 
meaning of God's book unless we have an obe- 
dient spirit. We should discard the interpre- 
tations of others just so far as we may justly sus- 
spect them of unwillingness to obey what they 



The Interpreter Himself. 25 

learn from that book. " The secret of the Lord 
is with them that fear Him," not with them that 
defy or mock Him. 

3. Ask the aid of the Holy Spirit in inter- 
preting the Scriptures. — Those who are honest 
and obedient seekers after the truth can consist- 
ently make this request. We need the Spirit to 
interpret that which He has inspired. What 
interpreter can equal the author of the book we 
are seeking to understand \ The author would 
be the best interpreter in any case, but this is 
especially true with reference to those things 
which must be " spiritually discerned." "He 
that is spiritual discerneth all things " (1 Cor. ii. 
15). It was promised to the disciples that the 
Spirit should " guide them into all truth " (John 
xvi. 13). We need not suppose that this prom- 
ise was limited to the Twelve. While Revela- 
tion is closed, the work of guiding disciples into 
the truth is still necessary. The Holy Spirit is 
promised to all. " If ye, then, being evil, know 
how to give good gifts unto your children, how 
much more shall your Heavenly Father give the 
Holy Spirit to them that ask Him " (Luke ix. 
13). And there are special promises which 



26 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

seem to fit the need of the interpreter. " If any 
man lack wisdom, let him ask of God, who giv- 
eth liberally to all men and upbraideth not" 
(James i. 5). If these promises are true, we 
cannot conceive that God would refuse the light 
of His Spirit to one who was faithfully seeking 
to know what He had revealed. In answer to 
prayer, we shall get the instructions of the 
Great Interpreter. While we may and must 
gain an understanding of many things by our 
own efforts, only by the aid of the Spirit can we 
apprehend the deeper meaning, the spiritual im- 
port, of the word. Let us, then, always begin 
our study of the Scriptures with a prayer for the 
aid of the Holy Spirit. 

II. THE INTELLECTUAL PREPARATION OF THE IN- 
TERPRETER. 

Of course, the more learning, talent, and dis- 
cretion one has, the better interpreter he can be. 
The maximum of these qualifications should be 
sought by one who proposes to interpret and 
expound the Scriptures for others. But our 
present purpose is to define the minimum of in- 
tellectual preparation essential to one who would 



The Interpreter Himself. 27 

understand the Scriptures for himself. Only 
such attainments as are within the reach of 
every person of average ability should be here 
discussed. We are not writing for scholars, but 
for the people. 

In order to understand the Bible it is not nec- 
essary to know Hebrew and Greek, the lan- 
guages in which it was originally written. Of 
course, an acquaintance with these languages is 
of great advantage to the interpreter ; but it is 
not necessary. The translations which we now 
have are nearly perfect. One would have to 
give lifelong study to Hebrew and Greek, and 
devote himself assiduously to the work of trans- 
lation, in order to equal them. While it is a 
satisfaction to read the Bible in the original 
tongues, not one in a hundred of those able to 
do it has any important advantage over one who 
cannot, in the matter of ascertaining its mean- 
ing. Do not lament your ignorance of Hebrew 
and Greek, if you have had no opportunity to 
learn them, but be assured that you can interpret 
the Bible fairly well without them. 

One does not have to be learned in science, or 
art, or mechanics, or mathematics, or secular 



28 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

history, or in any department of human knowl- 
edge, in order to interpret the Bible. Such 
knowledge may be a help ; the mental training 
gained in its acquisition would be a greater help ; 
but it is encouraging to every Bible student to 
know that it is not essential. One may be 
learned in the Scriptures without knowing very 
much of other things. That is the best kind of 
knowledge, since it can make us " wise unto sal- 
vation." And yet, a certain amount of intel- 
lectual preparation is necessary for successful 
Bible study. Let us see what it is. 

1. The Bible student should have education 
and mental training sufficient to enable him to 
apprehend the meaning of ordinary language. 
This seems like a very low requirement, but it 
is not so low as it seems. Language is a symbol 
of ideas, and many readers see the words with- 
out grasping the ideas of the most ordinary sen- 
tences. A fair test of whether one understands 
a sentence which he has just read would be to 
ask him to express the idea it contains in his 
own language. Of course, any reader could do 
that with simple statements of facts ; but when 
it comes to abstract ideas, arguments, rules of 



The Interpreter Himself. 29 

conduct and the like, it is quite a different 
tbing. 

It may be said that such a matter as this is 
quite beyond rules — that it is like saying one 
needs brains for the ordinary affairs of life. 
It is not quite the same. Brains cannot be sup- 
plied ; but the power to apprehend the meaning 
of ordinary language can be cultivated. The 
rule is never to pass a sentence in reading with- 
out being sure you know what it means. There 
must be exceptions to this rule, for some men 
write sentences which mean nothing, and the 
meaning of others is very obscurely expressed ; 
but if one were to follow that rule in his ordi- 
nary reading, it would greatly increase his power 
to interpret language. 

2. The ability to use Bible references, Bible 
dictionaries, an atlas of Bible lands, a concord- 
ance, and other similar helps to Bible study. 
Young people should be taught the meaning of 
the letters and figures on the margins of their 
Bibles, and shown how to use them. Some of 
these references are of very little value, being 
merely to verbal resemblances ; but others are 
valuable. To supply their deficiencies, we 



30 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

should learn to make references of our own. 
Every person should have a Bible of his own 
with wide margins on the pages, and be free to 
mark references at any time for use in future 
study. Bible students should also learn the use 
of the Concordance. This will be useful both 
in finding passages of which we can remember 
only a leading word, and in enabling us to col- 
late passages containing the same word. This 
may be the name of the subject of which the 
passages treat, and so the Concordance will be 
of great help to one in the topical study of the 
Bible. Every student of the Bible should have 
a Bible dictionary, and acquire the habit of 
using it. It is a good plan in all our systematic 
study of the Bible, to look up in such a diction- 
ary the name of every person, place, event, 
mountain, river, and other object which we may 
find in the passage under consideration, and 
learn all we can about it. To find the places 
named upon a map is a great help, since we are 
thus enabled to see their relations to other 
places. It is very easy to acquire the ability to 
do these things ; to acquire the habit is not so 
easy. 



The Interpreter Himself. 31 

3. An important part of the interpreter's in- 
tellectual preparation is knowledge of the geog- 
raphy and history of Bible lands, and of the 
manners and customs of the people in Bible 
times. He will have constant use for this kind 
of knowledge, for there are few passages of 
Scripture which can be understood without it. 
While the truth of the Bible was revealed by 
inspiration, the form in which that truth was 
expressed was much affected by the circum- 
stances in which its different books were written. 
We get at the truth through the form, and 
need, therefore, the fullest possible knowledge 
of the circumstances which affected its form of 
expression. It will be worth while to consider 
a few illustrations of this fact. As might be 
expected, we shall find most frequent references 
of this kind to the manners and customs of the 
people in Bible lands and times. One cannot 
understand the parables of the Ten Yirgins 
(Matt. xxv. 1-13), and of the Marriage of the 
King's Son (Matt. xxii. 1-14), nor the account 
of the wedding in Cana (John ii. 11), unless he 
is acquainted with the marriage customs of the 
Jews in the time of Christ. When we read that 



32 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

Jesus said, for the purpose of illustrating certaiu 
truths, that men do not put new wine into old 
bottles lest the bottles should burst (Matt. ix. 
17 ; Mk. ii. 22 ; Luke v. 37, 38), we have no idea 
of what He means so long as we think of glass 
bottles ; but when we know that they used 
leathern bottles, His meaning becomes clear. 
When we read that a paralytic whom Jesus 
healed arose, took up his bed and walked away 
with it (John v. 11, 12), a ludicrous and impos- 
sible image rises in our minds till we learn that 
the ordinary bed consisted simply of a thin 
mattress spread upon the ground or floor. In 
the Bible we read of grass growing upon the 
house-tops (Ps. cxxix. 6, 7), of people coming 
down from the house-tops as from their ordi- 
nary places of resort (Matt. xxiv. 17), and of 
things being proclaimed from the house-tops 
(Luke xii. 3). All this is unintelligible to us 
till we remember that the houses in Palestine 
were built with flat tops, and that people spent 
much of their time upon the roofs, and even 
made gardens on some of the larger houses. 
We read that the feet of guests were washed 
as they " sat at meat " (Luke vii. 38 ; John xiii. 



The Interpreter Himself, 33 

5), and wonder what was the occasion of it, and 
how it could be done. Knowledge of two facts 
makes it clear : one is that they wore not shoes 
and stockings, but sandals, which protected 
their feet from injury, but not from dust and 
dirt, making frequent washings necessary ; and 
the other, that they did not sit at the table, but 
reclined on couches with their feet projecting 
over the couches away from the table. John 
the Baptist describes Jesus as one " whose fan 
is in His hand, and He will thoroughly purge His 
floor" (Matt. iii. 12). If we think of a "fan " as 
an article with which to cool the face, we can- 
not see how a threshing-floor can be purged 
with it ; and we must learn that it was a large 
instrument used for winnowing grain, before we 
can form a correct mental picture of the figure. 
The many beautiful references to the shepherd's 
work to show what the Lord does for His people 
(Ps. xxiii.; John x. 1-16 ; Heb. xiii. 20, and 
others), have little force till we know how the 
Oriental shepherds cared for their flocks. To 
interpret the figures of ploughing, sowing, reap- 
ing, gleaning, and gathering into barns, we need 
to know how these things were done in the East 



34 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

in Bible times. Isaiah makes our Lord say, " I 
have trodden the wine-press alone " (Is. lxiii. 3). 
The meaning of the figure is plain when we re- 
member that to make wine, grapes were thrown 
into a great vat and their juice trodden out by 
men with bare feet and legs. 

There are frequent references in the Scrip- 
tures to the natural peculiarities of Bible lands, 
and figures of speech are formed from them 
which it is not always easy for us to understand. 
For example, the frequent comparison of divine 
blessings to water, the references to streams, 
fountains, and wells, and the figures drawn from 
thirst and its satisfaction, are hardly intelligible 
to us till we know that the Hebrews lived in a 
land where water is scarce and where intense 
thirst is a common experience. 

It is important for the interpreter to know 
something of the history not only of the Jewish 
nation, but also of the nations with which they 
came in contact. There is much of the Bible 
which we cannot understand without some 
knowledge of the Egyptians, Phoenicians, Syr- 
ians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, and Romans. 
Many passages both literal and figurative refer 



The Interpreter Himself. 35 

to Baal, Astarte, Dagon, Moloch, and other gods 
of the heathens, and we cannot interpret them 
without knowing who and what these false gods 
were. The heathen custom of offering food to 
idols and afterward eating it throws light on 
many passages (Dan. i. 8 ; Rom. xiv. 15-20 ; 
1 Cor. viii. 1-13), which speak of eating meat 
as though it might be a sin. We must know 
the relations of the Jewish nation to Home, in 
the time of Christ, before we can interpret 
aright the passages (Matt. xxii. 15-22; Mark 
xii. 13-17; Luke xx. 20-26), in which the Phari- 
sees and Herodians attempted to draw from our 
Lord utterances which might be construed 
as traitorous concerning allegiance to Caesar. 
Many of our Lord's discourses were uttered in 
controversy with the Pharisees, Scribes, and 
Sadducees. How can we understand such dis- 
courses unless we know what these parties were 
and the doctrines they believed and taught ? 

These are a few illustrations of many which 
might be given showing the interpreter's need 
of acquaintance with the history, and manners 
and customs of the people mentioned in the 
Bible. Some passages it is impossible to under- 



36 The Interpreter with his BiUe. 

stand at all without such knowledge ; other pas- 
sages lose half their force unless we know the 
circumstances which caused them to be uttered 
and gave them shape. Most of the knowledge 
thus needed can be obtained from a good Bible 
dictionary. 

4. The interpreter needs common-sense as 
part of his intellectual equipment. 

A caution may be needed in this connection. 
Many people reject certain interpretations and 
applications of Scripture on the ground that they 
are not sensible. By this it is meant that they 
do not conform to the common-sense judgments 
of mankind. But it should be remembered that 
the Bible is a Divine Revelation and that many 
of its statements directly contradict human opin- 
ions. What we think is true and right, and wise 
and good may not be so at all according to 
Divine standards. When we say that the inter- 
preter needs common-sense, we do not mean 
that he must interpret the Bible so as to make 
it conform to human sentiments and opinions. 
We must take what is said, and not what we 
think ought to be said. 

And yet, the interpreter does greatly need 



The Interpreter Himself. 37 

common-sense. It will save him from many 
foolish and misleading interpretations. It may 
be asked, What is the use of saying this? If 
one has not common-sense, can he acquire it ? 
He can, in some degree. Sound judgment, an- 
other name for the same thing, can certainly be 
cultivated. It is in part the result of observa- 
tion and experience. And it is not meant that 
every one deficient in common-sense is to ab- 
stain from reading the Bible. The Bible is not 
for the few, but for the many. But some illus- 
trations of what is meant by the use of common- 
sense in the interpretation of Scripture cannot 
but be helpful to one who desires to become a 
good interpreter. 

When Jesus was at the house of Martha and 
Mary in Bethany, He said to the former, who was 
" cumbered about much serving " : " One thing 
is needful" (Luke x. 38-42). This has been 
interpreted as meaning one dish, but common- 
sense would reject such an interpretation as be- 
neath the dignity of the occasion and out of har- 
mony with the rest of the verse. On the shore 
of Galilee, after the resurrection, Jesus said to 
Peter : " Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me 



38 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

more than these?" (John xxi. 15). This has 
been interpreted to mean " more than these " 
fish, but common-sense would reject that inter- 
pretation as trivial. Jesus said to the thief on 
the cross: "Verily I say unto thee, this day 
shalt thou be with me in Paradise." This is 
simple and plain enough, but men with a theory 
to support violate the first principles of com- 
mon-sense and adopt the silly interpretation, 
" Verily I say unto thee this day, thou shalt be 
with me in Paradise," an interpretation for 
which there is no warrant whatever. Jesus 
said, " Give to him that asketh thee, and from 
him that would borrow of thee turn not thou 
away" (Matt. v. 42). Common-sense forbids 
us to interpret this with absolute literalness, for 
if we were to do so and obey the precept, we 
should violate that very law of love which it is 
meant to illustrate and injure those who seek to 
live by abusing the good nature and charity of 
others. When James says, "The prayer of 
faith shall save the sick " (James v. 15), com- 
mon-sense should keep us from making it mean 
that we are to use no other remedy for sick- 
ness. 






The Interpreter Himself. 39 

But the need of common-sense is not limited 
to the interpretation of particular passages. 
Without it no part of the interpreter's work can 
be well done, as we shall see in the discussion 
which is to follow. 



CHAPTER II 

General Principles of Interpretation. 

Suppose one to be well prepared for the work 
of interpreting, he still needs rules for his 
guidance. The rules which we shall give in 
this manual are such as are generally accepted 
by interpreters. They have not been formed in 
the interests of any party or denomination of 
Christians. They are not intended to aid in the 
establishment of any particular set of doctrines. 
Their sole purpose is to aid students of the 
Bible in discovering its true meaning. If to 
follow them overthrows any one's theories of re- 
vealed truth, it will be conclusive evidence that 
his theories need to be revised. We make this 
claim because the justice and propriety of the 
rules are self-evident. If any one rejects them, 
it will be good evidence that he wants to estab- 
lish a theory rather than discover the real mean- 
ing of Scripture. Many a man would like to 
(40) 



General Principles of Interpretation. 41 

have Lesbian rules of interpretation — rules 
which he can bend to his wishes and so apply as 
to make the Scriptures yield the meaning he de- 
sires. But these rules are not of that kind. 
They are meant to be just and impartial. If 
they are so, any man should be willing to land 
where they will bring him. 

We have tried to make these rules so simple 
and plain that their application will be easy. 
Rules of interpretation that are more difficult to 
understand than the work to be interpreted 
would not be of much use. 

These rules should be thoroughly mastered, 
so that we can unconsciously apply them in our 
study of the Bible. Like the rules of good 
manners in society, or like the rules of elocu- 
tion, in order that they may be of the greatest 
use, we must know them so well that we can 
both forget and follow them. An occasional 
reference to rules may be necessary in deciding 
between two possible meanings of a passage ; 
but constant dependence upon them would 
hamper the interpreter. He should, therefore, 
be as familiar as possible with the general prin- 
ciples of interpretation. 



42 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

We shall find it convenient to group these 
rules in two great divisions. 

I. INTERPRET THE BIBLE AS YOU WOULD ANY 
OTHER BOOK. 

This rule is sometimes modified by the phrase, 
" so far as it is like any other book." But the 
rule itself suggests the principle that we are to 
adapt our method of interpretation to the nature 
of the book. The Bible is divinely inspired. In 
that it is unique — set apart from all other books. 
It is to be approached w T ith reverence and the 
spirit of obedience. We are not required to 
approach any other book with such feelings and 
purposes. We must accept its statements with- 
out question or cavil, simply seeking to know 
what they mean. The statements of other 
books we may criticise, question, reject, if we 
find good reason. In other books men like our- 
selves are speaking, and we are not required to 
be simple learners. When God speaks we have 
only to listen and obey 

But these differences do not affect the general 
principles of interpretation. It is true that God 
speaks in the Bible ; but, as already stated, we 



General Principles of Interpretation. 43 

may presume that He intends to be understood. 
His purpose was to convey facts and ideas in 
intelligible language. This simple fact is not 
always apprehended. Many seem to have an 
idea that a divine book is necessarily mysterious 
and obscure. They treat the Bible as though it 
were a sort of hieroglyph, which can be made 
out only by those who have the magical key. 
They forget that it was given through men for 
men, and was meant to be understood. In ad- 
dressing men He must use their language, and 
this language has certain well-known and ac- 
cepted principles of interpretation. 

Misconception on this point has been the 
cause of a great deal of bad interpreting. Hence 
we need to emphasize the general principle that 
the Bible is to be interpreted like any other 
book. This being granted, we may suggest a 
few specific rules of interpretation which we 
must follow in the study of any work. 

1. Consider the circumstances of the winter. 
— There is a human element in the Scriptures 
which affects not only their forms of expression, 
but also, to some extent, their substance. The 
writers were not mere machines, without thought 



44 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

or feeling of their own, but they were living 
men. God did not make them mere amanuen- 
ses who wrote at His dictation, but respected 
their personality and let it have its force in 
modifying what they wrote. In the Bible the 
mark of every man's character is deeply im- 
pressed upon his composition. By making this 
use of the personality of His agents, the Holy 
Spirit found better media for the conveyance of 
truth in its many aspects ; and gave profitable 
variety to the books of the Bible. We should 
be thankful for the humanity as well as for the 
Divinity of the inspired writings. 

The interpreter will be aided in his efforts to 
understand many books, if he studies the char- 
acter of the author and keeps in mind its prom- 
inent traits. Moses was a man of broad concep- 
tions, of intense energy, of wonderful patience, 
and of high moral tone. His character and 
habits of thought were greatly affected by his 
Egyptian training, by his experience in Midian, 
and by the sense of responsibility which he felt 
as the leader of Israel. We find this character 
impressed upon the Pentateuch, most of which 
he wrote. David was the poet of Israel, a 



General Principles of Interpretation. 45 

mati of strong passions, of affectionate nature, 
and of deep piety. His experience as the shep- 
herd of Jesse's flocks, as the outlaw fleeing 
from the wrath of Saul, and as the sinning and 
penitent king of Israel, are expressed in his 
Psalms. Without knowing the man an'd his 
history we cannot understand his writings. The 
most prominent trait of Paul's character was 
moral earnestness. When a Jew, he was one 
with all his heart ; when he became a Christian, 
he went into the work of Christ with a flaming 
zeal that nothing could quench. This intense 
earnestness is apparent in all he wrote, and we 
cannot appreciate his discourses and epistles un- 
less we remember what sort of man he was. 
That Luke was a physician explains many 
turns of thought and expression in the Gospel 
which bears his name, and in the Acts of the 
Apostles. 

We cannot know the character and habits of 
every inspired writer ; but so far as possible the 
interpreter should study them. And we should 
remember that all these men were Orientals, and 
had Oriental habits of thought and expression. 
Men of the East are usually less practical, less 



46 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

direct, less exact, more imaginative, more emo- 
tional, and less restrained than men of the West. 
We should also keep it in mind that the writers 
of the Bible were Jews, trained under the laws 
and according to the methods of that peculiar 
people. Even the New Testament writers were 
subject to this influence, though the ultimate 
effect of Christianity was to deliver the followers 
of Christ from Judaism. 

To know the situation of each writer at the 
time of his writing is sometimes a help in un- 
derstanding his works. For example, the epistles 
of Paul which he wrote from his Roman prison 
bear evidence of the fact and must be interpret- 
ed in the light of it. A careful study of the 
Acts is a great help in understanding all the 
epistles of this great author. As these writers 
were human, and as their circumstances would 
affect both their way of looking at truth and 
their forms of expression, the more the interpre- 
ter knows of them, the better for his work. 

2. Consider the design or purpose of the 
writer. — The interpreter should not only be ac- 
quainted with the character and circumstances of 
the writer whose book he is studying, but he 



General Principles of Interpretation. 47 

should try to ascertain his design or purpose in 
writing. For whom was the book written ? 
What was there in their character or circum- 
stances which called for it ? What purpose did 
the writer aim to accomplish by his book or 
epistle ? With what motives did he undertake 
its composition ? It may not be possible to 
answer all these questions about every book of 
the Bible, but we should know as much as we 
can about the author's design. It is impossible 
fully to understand any writer without taking 
this into account. 

A proper consideration of the design will 
affect the interpretation of some books much 
more than that of others. The purpose of some 
books is so general that it does not affect the 
details of the interpretation. The historical 
books of the Bible were written to show God's 
dealings with men, and how they act in certain 
relations with Him. In general it is the history 
of redemption ; but every historical book has its 
own particular purpose. Genesis tells of the 
Creation, of the Fall of man, and the Call of 
Abraham as the beginning of redemption. Ex- 
odus relates how the Chosen People were deliv- 



48 The Interpreter with hfc Bible. 

ered from Egyptian bondage, and instructed and 
trained for God's service. The purpose of the 
four Gospels is to set before us the Person, 
Character, Words, and Works of the Son of 
God, our Saviour. The Acts was written to 
show us how men act when they believe in 
Jesus and are tilled with the Holy Spirit. It 
will help us to interpret these and other histor- 
ical books if we keep in mind their purpose. 

The Psalms were written for devotional pur- 
poses and were intended to voice the religious 
feelings of the Hebrew People. The heart im- 
mediately interprets those which it can appro- 
priate and use. In many cases their time and 
circumstances must be considered before they 
can be understood. This is especially true of 
the Imprecatory Psalms, those in which venge- 
ance is sought upon the enemies of the author 
or of his people. In studying these Psalms it 
should be remembered that the Hebrews were 
taught to believe that their enemies were the 
enemies of God, and that under the law venge- 
ance upon one's enemies was understood to be 
permitted. 

The Prophecies were written to warn, to re. 



General Princijtfes of" Inter pre t ati on* 49 

buke. or to encourage the poop] ,1. It is 

e to get much 

without considering their design and the 
stances which called them forth. Take. 

example, the Prophecy of Jeremiah, who was so 
intensely human, and vet. wl with the 

ity power of God. He lived in the degen- 
erate days of Jtidah when, under such kings as 
Manasseh and Anion, the nation ipidly 

falling into idolatry and profligacy. He was bit- 
terly persecuted on account of his faithfulness 
in warning the people that national disaster and 
ruin would inevitably follow national sins. Keep 
these important facts in mind and you will not 
only be able to understand him. but you will also 
sympathize with his spirit and feel that he could 
not have spoken otherwise. Again, take Reve- 
lation, at the same time the grandest Prophecy 
of the Bible and the most difficult to under- 
stand. "With what purpose was it written I 

: learn this and the general import of the 
book becomes clear. John was an exile for 
Christ's sake on the Island of Patmos. The 
feeble young Church which had started at Jeru- 
salem with such buoyant hope was suffering ter- 



6 1 1 7 '// 1 Iut> rju \ im 10 Uh h is I! M . 

• 
ribk persecution. Rome, with an emperor irbo 
Beemed a lit incarnation of heathen cruelty and 
ferocity, had decreed its extinction. To human 
eyes it looked as though the powers of evil were 
to have everything their own way. In thia 
emergency the Lord sends a message to His 
churches. What could it be but a messa- 
encouragement? Through John, and with the 
use of types and symbols, He assures His trem- 
bling followers that His cause, — the cans 
truth — will surely conquer. Thia is the purpose 
of Revelation. It is the book of Christ's Tri- 
umph. Keep that purpose in mind, and, while 
some of the details of the book will remain ob- 
scure, its general import will be clear. 

These are examples of the use of considering 
the author's design for the sake of a general un- 
derstanding of his writings. 

In many cases the design of the whole book 
must be taken account of in interpreting partic- 
ular passages. To do this is often the beat way 
trie the meaning of passages which would 
otherwise be very difficult Paul Bays, "There- 
fore we conclude that a man is justified by faith 
without the <\vv(h of the law"(Bom. iii. 88} 



General Principles of Interpretation. 51 

Does he mean that one who believes in Christ 
will be saved even though he lives a wicked 
life? Men have put that interpretation upon 
his words. But if they had considered the de- 
sign of the whole book they could not have 
done so. The purpose of that book is to show 
that men are all sinners under a condemnation 
which they cannot escape by their own efforts, 
and that the only way of justification is by faith 
in Christ ; but he abundantly explains that the 
faith which secures justification is a faith which 
leads to holy living — to a righteousness higher 
and purer than was possible under the law. To 
correct the prevalent error that men must be 
saved by works, he has emphasized the opposite 
view. On the other hand, James says, " Ye see 
then how that by works a man is justified and 
not by faith only" (James ii. 24). But con- 
sider his purpose and you will see that he does 
not contradict Paul. He is writing against an 
abuse of the doctrine of justification by faith, 
and shows that a dead faith, a faith which pro- 
duces no good works, will not justify. In the 
First Epistle to the Corinthians, Paul seems to 
discountenance marriage (vii. 1, 8, 26), and to 



52 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

forbid women to speak in the meetings of 
the church (xiv. 34, 35). These passages have 
occasioned much difficulty ; but great light is 
shed on them by considering the purpose of the 
whole epistle. Paul had learned that licentious- 
ness was creeping into the church at Corinth, 
that there was disorder in their assemblies, that 
they were having trouble on account of the mar- 
riage of Christians with heathen, and of the ex- 
istence of various other evils and disorders 
among the members. To correct these evils, 
to quiet these disturbances, to counsel them in 
their perplexities, he writes this epistle. In 
such relations as they then held it might be 
better for them not to marry. With such dan- 
ger of disorder in their meetings, it would be 
better for the women to keep silent. 

Take another illustration from the First 
Epistle of John. He says (v. 18), " We know 
that whosoever is born of God sinneth not." 
This puzzles us, because we know that the chil- 
dren of God do sin. But consider the purpose 
of the whole letter. He says (ii. 1), " These 
things write I unto you that ye sin not." Then 
he goes on to show that all men sin, that for- 



General Principles of Interpretation. 53 

giveness of sins may be obtained through the 
intercession of Christ, but that the only cure 
for sin in the soul is the New Birth and the de- 
velopment of the New Man who cannot sin be- 
cause born of the Holy One. 

These are illustrations of the help which the 
interpreter gains by considering the design of 
the whole book of which he is studying a part. 

How is the scope or design of a book to be 
ascertained? Sometimes it is directly or in- 
ferentially stated by the writer himself, as in 
John xx. 31; Rom. iii. 28; James ii. 24; 1 
John ii. 1. In other cases it is to be gathered 
from various incidental remarks of the author, 
as in the letters to the Corinthians, to the Gala- 
tians, and to the Colossians. Sometimes it may 
be learned from the historical circumstances. 
But the best method of learning it is to read 
through the whole book carefully several times, 
trying each time to grasp the writer's general 
thought and purpose. This is the only fair way 
to treat any writing. To read a little here and 
there, without considering the relation of the 
part read to the whole, or to other parts, is 
certainly not the way to understand any of it. 



54 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

If you were to get an important letter from a 
wise and good man, and to-day should read a 
little near the end, and to-morrow should read 
a fragment in the middle, and next week should 
read a few lines near the beginning, you would 
not have a very clear idea of the meaning and 
purpose of his letter. But is not that the way 
most of us read the books of the Bible ? We 
may read in that way with profit after we have 
gained a good apprehension of the whole ; and 
some short passages are profitable taken wholly 
by themselves ; but there are not many portions 
of Scripture which are not made more valuable 
by considering them in connection with the 
whole book to which they belong; and most 
passages can be fully understood only in that 
way. Therefore, consider the author's design 
in writing the book. 

3. Get the meaning of the terms used. — 
"Give attention to definitions," said Samuel John- 
son, and he never uttered a precept containing 
more practical wisdom. It is as necessary to the 
intelligent study of an author as it is to clear 
thinking. It is a good rule never to pass a word 
in one's reading without being sure of its mean- 



General Princijjles of Interpretation. 55 

ing. We may not be able to give a scientific 
definition of every word we read, but we should 
at least be able to express its meaning in some 
word perfectly familiar to us. This rule is a 
primary one in all interpretation, but it has a 
few special applications in the interpretation of 
the Bible. 

The interpreter should know the meaning of 
every proper name which he meets in his Bible 
study. The name of every person, tribe, nation, 
country, city, mountain, river, idol, false god, 
battle, and the like, should be to him more 
than an arbitrary and empty symbol ; it should 
bring to his mind a definite image or fact. To 
be thus acquainted with its proper names would 
add greatly to the rich treasures of the Bible. 
The Bible dictionary will give the necessary in- 
formation. 

Many words in the English version of 1611 
have changed their meaning or become obsolete. 
Familiar examples are the words "thought" 
(Matt. vi. 25, 34), "prevent" (1 Thes. iv. 15), 
"conversation" (2 Cor. i. 12; Phil. i. 27; 
Heb. iii. 5), and " charity " (1 Cor. xiii.), where 
" thought " means anxious care, " prevent," go 



56 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

before, " conversation," way of life, and " char- 
ity," love. In all such cases the Canterbury re- 
vision, commonly called the New Yersion, will 
give one the right word. 

In ascertaining the meaning of terms it is, of 
course, a great help to know the original Hebrew 
and Greek. But I am writing for those who 
must content themselves with translations. If 
the meaning of a word is not perfectly known 
and the connection does not make it clear, refer- 
ence should be had to an English dictionary. If 
a word is used in more than one sense in differ- 
ent places in the Bible, the connection must de- 
termine what meaning it has in every case. A 
few illustrations will show the force of this sug- 
gestion. In Luke xiv. 26, our Lord said, "If 
any man come to me and hate not his father and 
mother, and wife and children, and brethren and 
sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be 
my disciple." In 1 John ii. 11, John says, 
" He that hateth his brother is in darkness, and 
walketh in darkness." It is evident that the 
word " hate " does not mean the same thing in 
both cases. In the former it means " love less 
than me "; in the latter, to " dislike intensely, 



General Principles of Interpretation. 57 

with a desire to injure "; and the context and 
parallel passages show the difference. In John 
iii. 16 we read, " God so loved the world that 
He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever 
believeth on Him might not perish." In 1 
John ii. 15, John says, " Love not the worldP 
Are we forbidden to love what God loves ? In 
one case " world " means the souls that are in 
the world ; in the other it means wealth, honor, 
carnal pleasure. Jesus said to Zacheus, "This 
day is salvation come to this house " (Luke xix. 
9). In Eom. xiii. 11, Paul says, " JS"ow is our 
salvation nearer than when we believed. " Jesus 
meant salvation from divine condemnation. 
Paul meant salvation from all sin and from all 
the evils incident to our earthly life. The word 
" save " is used indiscriminately in these two 
senses. In Scripture the word " death " is used 
to describe both the departure of the soul from 
the body and the eternal destruction of the lost 
soul. 

In the examples already given, the same 
Greek word is used in both cases. Occasionally 
we have the same English word for two different 
words in the Greek. In Heb. xii. 28, we are 



58 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

told to serve God with reverence. In Eph. v. 33, 
wives are exhorted to reverence their husbands. 
The two Greek words express exactly the shade 
of difference between the awe and adoration 
which we are to feel before God, and the honor 
which a wife should give her husband. By 
carefully considering the context and the nature 
of the subject under discussion, the Bible stu- 
dent will be able to discern these differences. 
And in every case he shouid know the meaning 
of the words he reads by giving attention to 
definitions. 

4. Interpret according to the nature of the 
subject. — The interpreter should guard the ap- 
plication of this rule by remembering that he is 
not trying to establish his opinion of what ought 
to have been taught, but to find what really was 
taught. It is easy for us to subvert the teaching 
of Scripture by saying that our Lord, or an in- 
spired writer, must have meant so and so, be- 
cause anything else would have been inconsistent 
with His nature or the " nature of things." It 
is by this fallacious process that men think they 
prove universal salvation, future probation, 
and other false doctrines. But when we get our 



General Principles of Interpretation. 59 

knowledge of the subject from the Scriptures, 
it is proper to interpret any particular word or 
passage according to the nature of the subject 
under discussion. A good illustration of this 
rule is seen in the passage just quoted from 
Luke xix. 26. We are taught by Scripture and 
by natural instinct to love our kindred. From 
the nature of the subject, therefore, we know 
that Jesus did not mean that we are to hate 
them in the ordinary sense of the word " hate "; 
but that if they should come between Him and 
us we must repudiate them rather than forsake 
Him. In Psalm vii. 11, we read, " God is 
angry with the wicked every day." Similar 
expressions concerning the anger of God are 
found in Ex. xxxii. 10 ; Deut. ix. 19, 20 ; Psalm 
cvi. 32, and in other places. Now the word 
"anger" ordinarily describes an evil passion, 
violent rage, which, unless restrained, would 
lead to evil deeds. But from what the Scrip- 
tures tell us of God, we know that His anger 
cannot be that, but is holy indignation against 
all iniquity. He has the same feeling against 
evil at all times ; but for wise reasons He may 
withhold punishment in one case and inflict it in 



60 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

another. In Gen. vi. 16, we read, "And it 
repented the Lord that He had made man on 
the earth, and it grieved Him to the heart." 
God knows all things from the beginning to the 
end and does not change ; He has no mistakes 
over which to mourn; and we must interpret 
this passage according to these facts. It means 
that God saw that men in their wickedness were 
bringing measureless evil out of that which He 
intended for good. It is said that the " Lord 
hardened Pharaoh's heart." We know that 
God could not be the direct and active agent of 
a wicked thing, for " God cannot be tempted of 
evil, neither tempteth He any man" (James 
i. 13). Pharaoh's heart was hardened, under a 
law which God has established, by his own re- 
peated refusals to do right. Other passages, 
6uch as 1 Kings xxii. 21-23 ; Is. vi. 10 ; Is. lxiii. 
17, are to be interpreted in accordance with this 
principle. These are perhaps sufficient illustra- 
tions of the importance of interpreting according 
to the nature of the subject. 

5. Take the most simple and natural mean- 
ing of the passage as likely to be the true one. 
— This is a very important rule. It forbids the 



General Principles of Interpretation. 61 

practice of allegorizing — a practice very com- 
mon with interpreters in the early days of 
Christianity. It was their custom to treat Old 
Testament history not only as real history, but 
also as having a second meaning. According 
to their view, every person and event, every re- 
lation and transaction, was intended to foreshadow 
and illustrate something which it resembled in 
the Kingdom of Christ. This led to many fan- 
ciful interpretations which had no basis in 
reality. Many things in the Kingdom of 
Christ may be illustrated by Old Testament his- 
tory, but we are not to conclude that the events 
of that history were intended to prefigure these 
things unless there is some intimation to that 
effect in the Scripture itself. The Old Testa- 
ment contains many types which are thus plainly 
indicated. The Jewish priests typified Christ 
as our Great High-Priest. David was a type of 
Christ in His kingly office. The prophets were 
types of Christ as a Teacher. The slain lamb, 
in the Mosaic ritual, typified Christ as a sacri- 
fice, " the Lamb of God that taketh away the 
sin of the world." The act of prayer was 
typified by the incense of the ritual. Leprosy 



62 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

was a type of sin. The brazen serpent set up 
on a pole to heal the serpent-bitten Israelites, 
was a type of Christ on the Cross. The forty 
years of wanderings in the wilderness typify 
the journey of the Christian through this world 
on his way to heaven. These are examples of 
what is meant by types. While the Old Testa- 
ment is thus a rich mine of illustrative truth, we 
are not to suppose that all of it has a double 
meaning. Much of it is plain history, written 
to show how God deals with men in pursuing 
His purposes of redemption. It is just as true 
in the interpretation of the New Testament that 
we should not seek for second or far-fetched 
meanings. The simple, natural meaning is 
much more likely to be the correct one. 

On the other hand, we should avoid extreme 
literalism. We must carefully distinguish be- 
tween literal and figurative language. This sub- 
ject is so important and extensive that we shall 
have to consider it in a separate chapter. But it 
is in place here to utter a warning against the 
literalism in interpretation which is at the root 
of so much false doctrine and so many foolish 
practices. It requires skill, common-sense, and 



General Principles of Interpretation. 63 

care to keep the path between allegorizing and 
literalism ; but a careful observance of the rules 
of interpretation will enable us to do it. A few 
examples of literalism will help to avoid it. 
Christ said, " If thy right eye causeth thee to 
stumble, pluck it out and cast it from thee; . . . 
if thy right hand causeth thee to stumble, cut it 
off and cast it from thee " (Matt. v. 29, 30). 
There have been those who have interpreted 
these literally, and maimed themselves in obedi- 
ence to its supposed meaning. Jesus said, " Re- 
sist not evil " (Matt. v. 39). A modern writer, 
interpreting this literally, says that it forbids 
society to punish criminals through its magis- 
trates by due process of law. Jesus said, " Swear 
not at all " (Matt. v. 34). The Friends, inter- 
preting this literally, make it prohibit the use of 
any form of oath in courts of law. Because we 
are commanded to observe the seventh day as 
the Sabbath, the literalists tell us that we must 
keep it on Saturday, because that is the seventh 
day as the Jews counted time. Out of a book 
which is nearly all symbolical, and in which 
symbolical numbers are constantly used, the lit- 
eralists take a passage (Rev. xx.) which predicts 



64 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

that Satan shall be chained and Christ shall reign 
a thousand years, and make it mean that in visi- 
ble person He shall reign on the earth for that 
exact period.* 

"With the caution against too great literalism 
kept in view, we may safely follow the rule to 
give the language of Scripture its simple, natural 
meaning. The meaning which first occurs to the 
intelligent and unbiased reader is usually the 
correct one. It may not be exhaustive, but it is 
likely to be correct so far as it goes. It seems 
hardly necessary to illustrate this, but a few ex- 
amples may be given. Jesus said to Nicodemus 
(John iii. 5), " Except a man be born of water 
and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the King- 
dom of God." There have been many ingenious 
and labored efforts to prove that " water " here 
means " the Word," but these spring from a Je- 
sire to combat the false doctrine of baptismal 
regeneration. The plain and obvious reference 
is to baptism as a symbol of regeneration. Jesus 
said (Matt. xvi. 18), " Thou art Peter, and upon 
this rock will I build my Church." The nat- 
ural meaning is that upon Peter the believing, 
* See note on Disputed Doctrines, page 19. 



General Principles of Interpretation. 65 

confessing, living stone, Christ would lay the 
foundation of His Church. Other interpreta- 
tions have probably been inspired by fear of 
countenancing a Romish error. 

II. INTERPRET SCRIPTURE BY SCRIPTURE. 

"The best commentary on the Bible is the 
Bible." This familiar rule has several forms of 
application. Every one of them constitutes an 
important rule in itself. It will be impossible 
to give them here the full discussion which 
their importance demands, but enough can be 
said to enable the interpreter to use them to 
good advantage. 

1. Interpret every passage with, reference to 
the general drift of the whole Bible. — If God 
was the author of the Bible, all its parts must be 
homogeneous. Every passage must fit into the 
whole, as the prepared stones of Solomon's 
Temple fitted into the completed structure. It 
follows that it is not well to treat any passage 
by itself, as though it were a complete utterance. 
It is not fair to judge the teaching of any author 
by scraps or isolated passages from his writings. 
By such a process we could convict any one of 



66 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

inconsistencies. And we should be very care- 
ful to observe this rule in interpreting the Bible 
because it contains such various forms of expres- 
sion. It has many ways of saying the same 
thing. This results in part from the fact 
that it has a great number of writers, and in 
part from the fulness of the Divine mind. 
This rule, that we must consider the drift or 
meaning of the whole Bible in interpreting any 
particular passage, is based on the assumption 
that all its parts are consistent with one another. 
It also assumes that the Bible has one central 
subject on which every part has some sort of 
bearing. 

The one grand theme of the Bible is Redemp- 
tion. It begins with the creation and fall of 
man ; shows the results of sin in human charac- 
ter and life ; proves by history that his course is 
ever downward ; tells how God has intervened 
to save him; traces the course of redemption 
from the promise that " the seed of woman " 
should "bruise the head of the serpent" till 
Christ, on the cross, said, " It is finished "; de- 
clares unmistakably that man is " dead in tres- 
passes and sins," and must be "born of the 



General Principles of Interpretation. 67 

Spirit" to be " alive unto God"; makes faith 
the condition of pardon and justification ; and 
teaches that the " new man " is to be perfected 
in holiness by the word of truth and the sancti- 
fying Spirit. From beginning to end it is a 
book of redemption — a book whose purpose is to 
make us " wise unto salvation." The key for its 
interpretation is to be found in the facts that 
man needs saving, that God alone can save him, 
and that God has made provision for his salva- 
tion in Christ, the crucified and risen Lord. 
All parts of the Scripture harmonize with its 
purpose to set forth redemption. All are to be 
interpreted in the fight shed by this supreme 
fact. If any passage seems out of harmony with 
these great doctrines of sin and redemption, it 
must be because we have not discovered its real 
meaning. It is very wonderful how all parts of 
the Bible can be made to harmonize with one 
another around that central theme. 

The observance of this rule has been called 
interpreting by "the analogy of faith." The 
general teaching of Scripture on any subject is 
easily ascertained. For example, let any one 
read the New Testament through and he would 



68 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

have no doubt that its writers meant to teach the 
Divinity of Christ. They declare Him to be the 
Son of God, and very God manifested in human 
form. Neither could the reader doubt that they 
meant to teach the Personality and Divinity of 
the Holy Spirit. And when he finds a single 
passage which declares the unity of the God- 
head, such as, " The Lord our God is one Lord " 
(Deut. vi. 4), or, " To us there is one God, the 
Father, of whom are all things " (1 Cor. viii. 6), 
we must interpret them in the light of the gen- 
eral teaching. There are three persons in the 
one God. It would be equally plain to such 
a reader that the one way of salvation is by faith 
in the Lord Jesus Christ. This is asserted so 
often and so emphatically that it is impossible to 
be mistaken about it. And yet we read, " Work 
out your own salvation" (Phil. ii. 12); "he 
that doeth the will of my Father which is in 
heaven shall enter into the kingdom of heaven " 
(Matt. vii. 21) ; God " will render to every man 
according to his deeds " (Rom. ii. 6), and many 
similar passages. These must be so interpreted 
as to harmonize with the main teaching on the 
subject. It is equally plain that the New Testa- 



General Principles of Interpretation. 69 

ment teaches that those who die impenitent will 
be eternally lost. No mistake on this point is 
possible to the honest reader. Yet it is said that 
God " will have all men to be saved and come 
to a knowledge of the truth " (1 Tim. ii. 4) ; and 
that " He is able even to subdue all things to 
Himself" (Phil. iii. 21). Making an attempt to 
interpret these " according to the analogy of 
faith," we find that " will " means "would" or 
" desires to " and that the Greek word should 
have been so translated. We find also that 
" subdue " need not mean " to make obedient," 
but ordinarily means " control," as criminals are 
controlled when they are imprisoned. These 
are illustrations of what is meant by interpreting 
" according to the analogy of faith." We should 
make every passage harmonize with the general 
teaching of the Bible. This we can always ac- 
complish without doing violence to the real 
meaning of the passage. In this way we shall be 
able to find its true interpretation. 

2. Consider the context. — This is substantially 
the same rule as the preceding applied to some 
particular part of the Bible rather than to the 
whole of it. The context may be defined as the 



TO The Interpreter with his Bible. 

portion of Scripture in immediate connection 
with the text. It will vary greatly in ex- 
tent. In some cases there will be no context at 
all, as in some parts of the book of Proverbs, 
where every sentence expresses a complete 
thought and may stand by itself without loss. 
In other cases, the context will properly include 
only a few sentences, or a single paragraph. 
This will be enough to enable one to discover 
the real meaning and bearing of the text. In a 
few cases, a text cannot very well be understood 
without taking into account the whole book of 
which it forms a part. This is the case with 
passages from such books as Romans and 
Hebrews. It is not easy to interpret any part of 
either of these books without considering the 
character and purpose of the whole. In this 
sense, the context is the same as the author's 
scope, or design, a subject which has already 
been discussed. In the ordinary sense, the con- 
text means a limited portion in connection with 
the text. 

In all connected discourse, study of the con- 
text is absolutely essential to correct interpreta- 
tion. It is rarely safe to take any single verse 



General Principles of Interpretation. 71 

of Scripture as though it presented a complete 
thought. And yet this is a very common prac- 
tice. Would-be interpreters disregard the con- 
nection and give to passages entirely wrong 
meanings. This is a favorite method with those 
who wish to use Scripture to establish doctrines 
which they have already adopted. It is possible 
to prove almost anything from the Bible by this 
method. The man who proved the duty of 
suicide by quoting, Judas " went and hanged 
himself," " go thou and do likewise,'' was not 
more absurd than many others who are more 
serious. A man preached on universal salvation 
from the text, " Ye shall not surely die " (Gen. 
iii. 4), entirely overlooking the fact that it 
was Satan who said it. In the Bible yon find 
the sentence, " There is no God " (Ps. xiv. 1). 
Look back a little and you see it prefaced by the 
words, " The fool hath said in his heart." These 
are very obvious and absurd violations of the 
rule to consider the context. In most cases it 
is done where the mistake is not so obvious, and 
the wrong interpretation which follows is all the 
more misleading. A few examples will make 
plain the importance of the rule and the method 



72 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

of observing it. In Gal. v. 4 we read, " Ye are 
fallen from grace." This is often quoted as 
though it meant that they had backslidden and 
become neglectful of Christian duties. The con- 
nection will show that it has no reference to such 
a decline of personal piety. The whole sentence 
reads, " Christ is become of no effect unto you, 
whosoever of you are justified by the law ; ye 
are fallen from grace." That is, they had lost 
the idea and hope of salvation by grace, and had 
fallen back to legalism — to dependence on good 
works. In Rom. viii. 8 we read, " So then they 
that are in the flesh cannot please God." Taken 
by itself this might mean that none of us can 
please God so long as we are in this world. 
But the connection makes it plain that " in the 
flesh " does not mean " in the body," but " un- 
der the control of the carnal mind." The words, 
" Touch not ; taste not ; handle not " (Col. ii. 
21), are often made to do service as a text on 
temperance. One who studies the connection 
will see that Paul was not writing on that sub- 
ject at all, but against Judaism and Jewish ordi- 
nances. Many obscure sayings of our Lord be- 
come plain when we study the context. He 



General Principles of Interpretation. 73 

said, a Many that are first shall be last ; and the 
last first " (Matt. xix. 20 ; Mk. x. 31 ; Luke xiii. 
30). The context shows His meaning to be that 
the first in privilege will often be last in re- 
ward because they have despised their oppor- 
tunities. Several times he said, " For unto every 
one that hath shall be given, and he shall have 
abundance ; but from him that hath not shall be 
taken away even that which he hath" (Matt, 
xxv. 29 ; Luke viii. 18). This is hard to under- 
stand until the Parables of the Talents and of 
the Pounds, with which it is connected, make it 
plain that those who use their powers and op- 
portunities to serve Grod will get more, while 
those who neglect them will lose what they 
have. 

Careful study of the context will do at least 
four things : It will enable us to reconcile many 
apparent contradictions ; it will make many ob- 
scure passages plain ; it will give the right mean- 
ing in many cases where, without it, a wrong 
one would be adopted ; and it will give richness 
and fulness of meaning to texts that by them- 
selves seem unimportant. No rule of inter- 
pretation is more important than this. Decide 



74 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

upon the meaning and application of no text 
until you have studied the context. 

3. Study the parallel passages. — We may 
divide all parallelisms into verbal and real. The 
former are those in which the same word occurs. 
They are the parallelisms most frequently in- 
dicated in the reference Bibles. The main 
use of them is to enable us to understand the 
meaning of terms. When a term is of doubtful 
meaning in any passage, the study of other pas- 
sages which contain it will generally aid us in 
our efforts to give it a precise and definite mean- 
ing. This has already been discussed in the 
paragraph on the meaning of terms. 

Real parallelisms are those in which the same 
subject is treated. They may be doctrinal or 
historical. It must be remembered that the 
Bible was written by many different men in 
widely separated periods of time. It is all on 
the general subject of religion, and is character- 
ized by remarkable unity. Almost every sub- 
ject is treated by more than one writer, and some 
by many writers. It is of the utmost import- 
ance that we should compare their different 
views with one another if we would arrive at 



General Principles qf Interpretation. 

the correct meaning of the whole. A single 
writer will often make several references to a 
subject, and it is but fair to him that we should 
consider all that he says on it before deciding 
what is his doctrine. 

In one passage we may find that a doctrine is 
lightly touched upon or only alluded to, and we 
must look to the parallel passages for its full 
treatment. In some cases a passage that ■ 
score will be made clear by the study of its 
parallels. In other cases, passages which seem 
out of harmony with the general teachii-. 
Scripture are fully explained in the same way. 

A few illustrations will show the method 
and importance of comparing parallel passages. 
Jesus said (John x. 8), " All that ever came be- 
fore me are thieves and robbers : but the sheep 
did not hear thein." Taken by itself, this might 
mean a universal condemnation of the Jewish 
prophets and teachers of the past ; but in other 
places (John viii. 4 v. 45-47 -±1\, 

we find Him strongly commending Abraham, 
Moses, and the prophets. In the former case 
He undoubtedly : to pretended messiahs, 

or to all false and misleading teachers. An ob- 



76 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

score passage like (John vi. 53), u Except ye 
eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His 
blood, ye have no life in yon," is made plain by 
a reference to Matt. xxvi. 26, 28, where the in- 
stitution of the Lord's Snpper is narrated. "We 
see at once that Jesus was speaking metaphori- 
cally and referring to a symbol of spiritual 
realities. One reading in First Corinthians, and 
coming upon the expression (v. 7), " Christ our 
passover is sacrificed for us," would hardly know 
what it meant until he referred to Exodus xii., 
and read the story of the Passover. Then the 
whole doctrine of the Atonement, which is here 
merely alluded to, would be plainly unfolded. 

In the study of parallel passages, we shall 
come upon many apparent contradictions, and it 
is important to know just how to treat them. 
In most cases, as soon as we study the context 
and get at the real meaning of the two passages, 
they will be seen to be in harmony. In other 
cases, where the contradiction seems real in spite 
of such study, we must accept that passage as 
true which most nearly accords with the general 
teaching of Scripture and confess that we do 
not understand the other. Where one passage 



General Principles of Interpretation. 77 

seems to contradict several others, we must give 
it a meaning which will make it agree with the 
rest, if it will bear such a meaning. If it will 
not, we must wait for light upon it. It is not 
fair to found upon a single passage a doctrine 
which is controverted by many passages. A 
few examples may be given. John says in his 
First Epistle (iii. 9), "Whosoever is born of 
God doth not commit sin ; for his seed reniain- 
eth in him : And he cannot sin because he is 
born of God." In the same Epistle (i. 8) he 
says, " If we say that we have no sin we deceive 
ourselves, and the truth is not in us." It is 
evident that the latter is in harmony with the 
general drift of Scripture, which plainly teaches 
that even true Christians are imperfect and sin- 
ful. What then does the former mean ? It can 
only mean that the new, divine nature given to 
the Christian by the Spirit of God is without 
sin. Jesus said (John v. 40), " Ye will not 
come unto rae, that ye might have life." He 
also said (John vi. 44), " No man can come to 
me, except the Father which hath sent me draw 
him." If one should attempt to excuse himself 
from the duty of accepting Christ by appealing 



78 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

to the latter verse, the reply should be that the 
Father draws by His Spirit all to whom Christ 
is preached, but that some resist and reject Him. 
Jesus said (Matt. vii. 7), " Knock, and it shall be 
opened unto you." He also said (Luke xiii. 24), 
" Many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in and 
shall not be able." The former refers to prayer ; 
the latter refers to the effort which the unsaved 
will make to get into heaven. So understood 
the two verses do not contradict each other. In 
Gen. vi. 6, we read, " It repented the Lord that 
He had made man on the earth, and it grieved 
Him at His heart"; while in 1 Samuel xv. 29, 
we find, " The Lord is not a man that He should 
repent." The latter is plainly in accord with 
the general teaching of Scripture that God is 
immutable. In the former, then, the word " re- 
pent " must be used in a figurative sense, and 
the whole expression is an example of the adap- 
tation of language about God to human compre- 
hension. 

Another class of difficult passages are those 
called Historical Parallels. The same history is, 
in several cases, narrated by different writers, or 
repeated by the same writer. Examples are the 



General Principles of Interpretation. 79 

histories of the Hebrew people in Samuel, and 
Kings, and in Chronicles, the four Gospels, 
which are four separate biographies of our Lord, 
and the three accounts of Paul's conversion in 
Acts. The student of these parallel histories 
will find frequent apparent discrepancies and 
inconsistencies. Space need not be taken for 
examples, but three suggestions may be given 
which will enable Bible students to overcome 
most of these difficulties. First, consider that, 
while the Bible narratives are never incorrect, 
they are often very brief and incomplete. If 
we had fuller details in these histories, these ap- 
parent discrepancies would disappear. Secondly, 
consider that each writer looked at the events 
from his own point of view and recorded that 
by which he was most impressed. Third, that 
these parallel histories are given us in order that 
the record may be more complete, and we 
should combine them to get a full understand- 
ing of the events. 



CHAPTER III. 

The Interpretation of Figurative Language. 

The truths of the Bible are very largely ex- 
pressed in figurative language. We should 
expect this from the nature of the topics dis- 
cussed. Every student of language knows that 
most of the terms used to convey abstract ideas 
were originally metaphors The reason was 
that such ideas could be clearly expressed to 
ordinary minds only by clothing them in terms 
relating to objects and events with which they 
were familiar through the senses. Some resem- 
blance between the idea and the visible object 
would cause the name of the latter to be 
given to the former. So mental and emo- 
tional processes would be described in language 
naturally applied to events in the material world. 
Most of these terms have lost their metaphorical 
character and have come to be regarded as plain 
language. 

If this necessity appears in metaphysics and 
(80) 






Interpretation of Figurative Language. 81 

logic, much more we should expect to find it in 
language intended to convey spiritual truths. 
These are of such a character that they can be 
made intelligible to man only by the use of the 
analogies between them and familiar objects. 
We should expect, then, to find the Bible just 
what it is, a book in which figures of speech are 
used with great frequency and profusion. For 
it contains a revelation of new truths — of truths 
entirely beyond the power of man to conceive 
without such a revelation, and which must be 
expressed in words whose meaning he can ap- 
prehend. Another reason may be given for the 
great amount of figurative language found in 
the Bible. People of strong and active imagina- 
tion are prone to express themselves in figures 
of speech. The Orientals are an imaginative 
people and the Bible was written in their style 
of language. 

While the figures of speech in the Bible orig- 
inated in a real necessity, and add infinitely to 
its power as a medium of revelation, they in- 
crease somewhat the difficulty of interpreting it. 
It must not be supposed that rhetorical figures 
are used in the Bible merely for ornamentation. 



82 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

They serve a distinct purpose in making ideas 
clear and forcible. At the same time they fre- 
quently add to the difficulty of ascertaining pre- 
cisely what ideas the writer meant to express. 
This is especially the case where the figure is 
borrowed from objects and events with which 
we are no longer familiar. This matter has 
seemed to me of so much importance that I have 
decided to give a separate chapter to the inter- 
pretation of figurative language in the Bible. 

The first step is to gain a clear conception of 
figurative as distinct from plain or literal lan- 
guage. A figure of speech is an expression in 
which a thing is said in the form of another 
thing related to it. This relation may be one of 
resemblance, or contrast, or position. Thus, 
when Jesus said, " I am the door," we perceive 
at once that He is using a figure of speech 
founded on comparison. When we read, " God 
so loved the world," we know that it does 
not mean the round globe, but the people 
on it. We see that it is a figure of speech 
founded on the relation of position, — that is, on 
contiguity. In each of these cases, one thing is 
spoken of in the form of another thing related 



Interpretation of Figurative Language. 83 

to it. That is the distinctive feature of all fig- 
urative language. 

And yet it is not always easy to tell whether 
language is to be taken figuratively or literally. 
In some cases to arrive at a just decision on this 
question is one of the most difficult problems of 
interpretation. A few suggestions on this sub- 
ject will be useful to the interpreter. 

1. In most cases we can determine whether 
or not language is figurative by the nature of 
the subject. Exercising ordinary sense and 
judgment, is it possible or reasonable to give the 
passage a literal meaning ? If it is not, then the 
passage must be figurative, and we should inter- 
pret it on that basis. For example, when Jesus 
6ays, "I am the door" (John x. 9), "I am the 
true vine " (John xv. 1), " I am that bread of 
life" (John vi. 48), and when He is spoken of as 
"the Lamb of God" (John i. 29), "a chief 
corner-stone " (1 Peter ii. 6), and as " the Lion 
of the tribe of Judah " (Kev. v. 5), we know 
that He is neither a door, a vine, bread, a lamb, 
a stone, or a lion ; and that these expressions 
are figurative. It is impossible to read them 
literally. In like manner, we know that Such 



84 The Interpreter with his Bihle. 

expressions as " Except ye eat the flesh of the 
Son of Man and drink His blood, ye have no 
life in you " (John vi. 53), " This is my body," 
and " This is my blood " (Matt. xxvi. 26, 28), 
are figurative, and that in taking them literally 
a simple and obvious rule of interpretation is 
violated. 

2. Another method of determining whether 
language is to be taken literally or figuratively 
is to compare the two meanings with other 
Scriptural teaching. This comparison may ex- 
tend only to the context, or it may include the 
general teaching of the whole Bible. With 
which meaning does the passage best fit into the 
general temple of divine truth % 

A few illustrations will make plain the appli- 
cation of this rule. When Isaiah, addressing 
Israel, says (Is. i. 22), " Thy silver is become 
dross, thy wine mixed with water," we know 
that he does not refer to material loss, for in 
the next verse and same sentence he speaks of 
the degradation of their princes and the corrup- 
tion of their judges, showing plainly that he 
refers to them under the figures of silver and 
wine. In Amos viii. 9, we read this prophecy : 



Interpretation of Figurative Language. 85 

" And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the 
Lord God, that I will cause the sun to go down 
at noon, and I will darken the earth in the clear 
day." We might take this as descriptive of 
physical phenomena, if the next verse did not 
tell us of calamities coming upon a rebellious 
people. This makes it clear that the prophet is 
using a figure to show the suddenness of the 
calamity. Jesus said (Matt. v. 39), " Whosoever 
shall smite thee on the right cheek, turn to him 
the other also." Taken literally, this would 
mean that when a Christian receives a blow he 
is to invite another. That this is not the mean- 
ing is plain from the first part of the command, 
which is, "Kesist not evil." We are not to 
strive, or contend, or strike back ; rather than 
do that, we should be willing to take another 
blow, but we need not invite it. The command 
is a figurative way of saying that we are to be 
meek and gentle. John the Baptist said of 
Jesus, the coming Messiah (Matt. iii. 12), that 
He was one " whose fan is in His hand, and He 
will thoroughly purge His floor, and gather His 
wheat into the garner ; but He will burn up the 
chaff with unquenchable fire." This last clause, 



86 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

and other passages like it, have been taken to 
mean that the impenitent wicked are to be pun- 
ished in literal fire. But there is no more 
reason for giving such a meaning to this clause 
than there is for saying that the good are to be 
gathered into a literal granary. The whole pass- 
age is figurative and all its parts are to be inter- 
preted alike. 

In some cases, figurative language can be dis- 
tinguished by taking into account the nature and 
teaching of the whole book in which it is found. 
In Kev. xx. 1-3, John says, " I saw an angel 
come down from heaven, having the key of the 
bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. 
And he laid hold on the dragon, that old ser- 
pent, which is the Devil and Satan, and bound 
him a thousand years, and cast him into the bot- 
tomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon 
him." Many have supposed that this refers to a 
literal event which is to occur in the future. In 
the beginning of the next chapter John says, 
" I saw a new heaven and a new earth ; for the 
first heaven and the first earth were passed away ; 
and there was no more sea." Those who take this 
literally suppose that we have here a lesson in the 



Interpretation of Figurative Language. 87 

geography of the future. They infer from it 
that the earth is to be newly fitted up for the 
future habitation of the redeemed. The fact 
that the passages occur in a book of symbols 
should have saved every one from such an inter- 
pretation. Both passages are in keeping with 
the rest of the book, and are purely symbolical. 
The former represents the fact that by the spread 
of truth and by the effects of redeeming grace, 
Satan is to be deprived of his power in the 
earth. The latter is a vision intended to repre- 
sent to the apostle the wonderful changes which 
the Gospel of the Son of God will produce. It 
will be as though the heavens and the earth had 
all been made new. 

One may often determine whether an obscure 
or difficult passage is to be taken literally or 
figuratively by comparing the two meanings with 
the general teaching of Scripture. On the night 
of His betrayal, Jesus said (Luke xvii. 36), " He 
that hath no sword, let him sell his garment and 
buy one." Considering only the immediate con- 
nection, this seems like a command from our 
Lord that His followers should arm themselves 
for literal warfare. But if we consider the gen- 



88 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

eral teaching of Christ ; that He said (Matt. v. 
39), " Kesist not evil," " My kingdom is not of 
this world, else would my servants fight " (John 
xviii. 36), and "All they that take the sword 
shall perish with the sword " (Matt. xxvi. 52) ; 
and that His apostles all understood Him to for- 
bid them to engage in war, we perceive that this 
is a symbolical saying in which He counsels them 
to make use of any proper means of defense 
against their enemies. In Acts xxii. 16, Anani- 
as is reported as saying to Paul, "Arise and be 
baptized and wash away thy sins." By itself 
this would mean that there is cleansing power 
in baptismal waters ; but we know from the 
general teaching of Scripture that they have no 
such efficacy. Our souls can be cleansed only by 
the redeeming mercy and grace of God, mani- 
fested through Jesus Christ "whose blood 
cleanseth from all sin." The words of Ananias, 
then, are not to be taken literally, but as describ- 
ing a symbolical rite. Paul wrote to the Thes- 
salonians (iv. 14), " For if we believe that Jesus 
died and rose again, even so them also which 
sleep in Jesus will God bring with Him." 
From this and other similar passages it has been 



Interpretation of Figurative Language. 89 

inferred that the souls of the dead sleep till the 
resurrection. But from the general teaching of 
Scripture we learn that the word " sleep " is 
used in a figurative sense to describe death and 
that it applies only to the body. The figure is 
a common one among all peoples and it is ab- 
surd to consider it as a literal expression and to 
found an important doctrine upon such an in- 
terpretation of it. 

In discussing the subject of discriminating be- 
tween literal and figurative language, it is im- 
portant to note that we should guard ourselves 
against the tendency to regard that as figurative 
which was intended to be plain history. Some 
interpreters would explain away the supernat- 
ural element in the Scriptures by saying that 
many of its stories are mythical. They are not 
real history, but are myths intended to teach 
important religious truths in the garb of fiction. 
There is one simple rule which we are to apply 
in every such case. Are these accounts given 
as plain history \ If they are in prophecies, and 
are spoken of as visions ; if they occur in high- 
wrought oratorical passages ; or in poetry, where 
the imagination has full play ; they may be fig- 



90 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

urative. But if they are parts of plain narrative, 
with no intimation that they are myths or fables, 
it is a violation of the first principles of inter- 
pretation so to regard them. It is evident to 
every honest reader of the Bible that the stories 
of Eden, of Sinai, of Jonah, of the Birth of 
Christ, and of the Kesurrection are given as 
plain history. They must be so read by all who 
regard the Bible as a trustworthy book. 

When we have determined that a passage is 
figurative, there is one simple rule for its inter- 
pretation in every case : reduce it to plain lan- 
guage. It is not always easy to do this ; in some 
cases it is impossible to express the exact idea 
without the use of figures of speech ; but gener- 
ally the rule will be found to work without dif- 
ficulty. Let us now consider a few examples of 
its application to different kinds of figures. 

One of the most common rhetorical figures of 
the Bible is the metaphor. It is usually easy 
to reduce this to plain language. When Jesus 
said (John x. 9), " I am the door," He meant, " I 
am the opening through which men pass from 
the world into the kingdom of God." When He 
said (John xv. 5), " I am the vine, ye are the 



Interpretation of Figurative Language. 91 

branches," He meant, "lam your source of life ; 
I make you of the same nature as myself ; I do 
my work in the world through you." Jesus 
sent a message to Herod in the words, " Go ye 
and tell that fox " (Luke xiii. 3). He meant, 
" Go and tell that cunning, crafty, and mischiev- 
ous man." In the lxxxiv. Psalm it is said, " The 
Lord God is a sun and shield." This means 
that the Lord gives light, warmth, and protec- 
tion to His people. Frequently several meta- 
phors are combined in one sentence and used to 
express a single idea. The Lord said to Paul 
(Acts xxvi. 14), "It is hard for thee to kick 
against the pricks." Reduced to plain language 
this means, "In persecuting my disciples and 
opposing me, you are only injuring yourself." 
Isaiah says (lv. 1), " Ho, every one that thirsteth, 
come ye to the waters, and he that hath no 
money ; come ye, buy and eat ; yea, come, buy 
wine and milk without money and without 
price." Here there are at least three distinct 
mataphors. Spiritual desire is compared to 
thirst ; power to satisfy one's desire is compared 
to money; and divine grace is compared to 
water, wine, and milk. Substitute these phrases 



92 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

for the terms in the text, and you reduce the 
passage to plain language. 

The allegory has been described as an extend- 
ed metaphor. In this figure the details of the 
metaphor are given, and its different parts are 
each made to represent some event or transac- 
tion in the spiritual world. The pure allegory 
is always in the form of a narrative. There is 
a beautiful allegory in the Eightieth Psalm 
(vs. 8-16), in which Israel is compared to a 
vine. " Thou hast brought a vine out of Egypt : 
Thou hast cast out the heathen and planted it. 
Thou preparedst room before it, and didst cause 
it to take deep root and it filled the land. The 
hills were covered with the shadow of it, and the 
boughs thereof were like the goodly cedars." I 
need not quote the whole of it. Substantially 
the same allegory is used by Isaiah (v. 1-7). It 
is easy to reduce this to plain language by sub- 
stituting "nation" for "vine"; "placed" for 
" planted "; " to be firmly established," for " to 
take deep root"; and so on throughout the alle- 
gory. In Ezekiel xvii. we find an allegory in 
which Nebuchadnezzar is represented as an eagle ; 
the royal family of Israel, by a cedar, of which 



Interpretation of Figurative Language. 93 

Jehoiachin is the highest branch ; the Babylon- 
ian exile, by the transplanting of this branch ; 
Pharaoh, by another great eagle ; and the bad 
results of Israel's turning to Pharaoh, by the 
withering of the vine which had grown from 
the branch. The interpretation of this is given 
by the prophet in the remainder of the chapter. 
Our Lord's comparison of Himself to a shepherd 
(John x. 1-18) is really an allegory. Some- 
times this figure is contained in a brief passage, 
as when our Lord says (Kev. iii. 20), " Behold I 
stand at the door and knock : if any man hear 
my voice and open the door, I will come in to 
him and will sup with him and he with me." 
Reduced to plain language, this means : " I seek 
admission to the souls of men through their 
will ; if any man recognizes me, and admits me 
to his soul, I will abide with him and he shall 
have fellowship with me." 

The allegory closely resembles the parable. 
The chief difference is that in the allegory the 
spiritual objects and events are directly repre- 
sented by the lower ones used in the figure, 
while in the parable they are illustrated by 
them. In the allegory the two sets are usually 



94 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

identified ; but in the parable they are compared 
with each other. In most cases this comparison 
is directly stated. Another difference is that in 
the allegory every object and event in the narra- 
tive represents something corresponding to it in 
the spiritual world ; while the parable is intend- 
ed to illustrate and enforce one great truth, and 
its correspondences vary greatly in the closeness 
with which they can be applied. The parable 
was used so constantly in the teaching of our 
Lord, that we shall be justified in giving it 
special attention. The Great Teacher has given 
us the interpretation of two parables, — that of 
the Sower (Matt. xiii. 3-8 and 18-23), and that 
of the Tares (Matt. xiii. 24-30 and 36-43). 
These may serve as models for all the rest. As 
a rule the best way is first to get at the central 
truth of the parable and then to trace the corre- 
spondences between the material transaction and 
the spiritual which it illustrates, though in some 
cases it is better to reverse this process. 

Let us apply this method to the parable of the 
Prodigal Son (Luke xv. 11-32). The central 
thought of this parable is the forgiving mercy 
of God. The immediate purpose of it was to 



Interpretation of Figurative Language. 95 

rebuke the Pharisaical spirit. Tracing the cor- 
respondences we find f The Father is God. The 
prodigal son is man fallen in sin. The far coun- 
try is his moral alienation from God. The 
famine is the destitution of the sinner's soul. 
Feeding swine represents the low pursuits of 
the sinner. His return is the sinner's awaken- 
ing and repentance. The father's coming out 
to meet him is God's willingness to receive the 
penitent. The robe, the ring, and the shoes 
are the favor and dignity bestowed upon the 
forgiven sinner. The festival is the rejoicing in 
heaven over the penitent. The older son is the 
self-righteous man. His anger is the feeling of 
the self-righteous toward God and the redeemed 
on account of free salvation. The father's re- 
buke represents the wrath of God against the 
self-righteous. 

As another illustration of the true method, 
let us interpret the parable of the Unmerciful 
Servant (Matt, xviii. 21-35). Here the central 
thought is the obligation of Christians to forgive 
without limit. The king is God. The servant 
is man in his relations to God. The great debt 
is man's guilt. The command to sell the servant 



96 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

and his family is the sentence of the law on the 
sinner. The prayer for patience and the prom- 
ise to pay represent the act of the sinner con- 
scious of his danger. The king's forgiveness 
is God's forgiveness. The conduct of the serv- 
ant towards his fellow-servants is the conduct of 
the Christian who refuses to forgive others. 
The small debt represents the offense of men 
against us. The fellow-servants are the saints 
and angels. The second sentence represents the 
eternal condemnation of persons who will not 
forgive those who have wronged them. 

As an instance of a parable where all the de- 
tails are not to be considered as having parallels 
in the spiritual world, we may take the parable 
of the Unjust Steward (Luke xvi. 1-9). The 
central thought is the importance of so using 
our material possessions that they will inure to 
our benefit in the world to come. The rich 
master is God. The accuser of the steward is 
the law. The account required is that which 
men must render to God. The servants whom 
the steward favors are persons whom Christians 
may serve with their worldly possessions. The 
steward's expedient represents the timely, wise 



Interpretation of Figurative Language. 97 

use of a Christian's wealth to make friends for 
eternity. The master's praise is God's com- 
mendation of the foresight of Christians who 
thus use wealth to fill heaven with friends. But 
notice that it is the foresight, not the dishonesty, 
of the steward which is commended. He is 
called " the unjust steward." Why, then, is he 
taken as an example ? Simply because his action 
illustrates admirably the one point of the neces- 
sity of foresight and prudence on the part of 
Christians. Our Lord takes from the sphere of 
pure worldliness a natural and probable trans- 
action to teach Christians that they should be as 
wise in spiritual things as this man was in tem- 
poral. Here it is plain that the correspondences 
cannot be forced beyond the illustration of this 
single point. 

To save space I have condensed these inter- 
pretations as much as possible ; but they will 
illustrate the method to be followed in the study 
of parables. 

The figure called personification is frequently 
used in the Bible. Examples are : " The morn- 
ing stars sang together " (Job xxxviii. 7); " Hear, 
O heavens, and give ear, O earth " (Isaiah i. 2) ; 



98 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

"If these should hold their peace, the stones 
would immediately cry out " (Luke xix. 40). In 
this figure inanimate objects are made to act 
as though they were intelligent beings. In in- 
terpreting such expressions it is only necessary 
to remember that they are figurative. 

Strictly speaking, the proverb is not a rhetor- 
ical figure, though proverbs are generally figur- 
ative. The Hebrew word for proverb means 
similitude, and nearly every proverb contains a 
comparison of some kind. The form is usually 
that of the antithesis, or balanced sentence, 
which is classified as a distinct figure of speech. 
" A soft answer turneth away wrath ; but griev- 
ous words stir up anger " (Prov. xv. 1), is a good 
example. In " The name of the Lord is a strong 
tower ; the righteous runneth into it and is 
safe " (Prov. xviii. 10), we have the balanced sen- 
tence, a metaphor in the first member, and a 
brief allegory in the second. But the proverbs 
are easy to interpret, and need no special rules. 
The same may be said of all the ordinary figures 
of speech which occur in such abundance in 
the Bible. 

Only one other form of expression demands 



Interpretation of Figurative Language. 99 

our attention in this place, namely, the sym- 
bol. This can hardly be called a rhetorical 
figure, and yet it is a highly figurative method 
of expressing truth. A symbol is a material ob- 
ject, or a transaction in the material world, to rep- 
resent some truth of a higher and more spirit- 
ual nature. The historical and ritual symbols of 
the Old Testament which point to the nature 
and work of Christ are called types. The 
Kingdom of David was a type of the Kingdom 
of Christ. The sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham 
(Gen. xvii.) was a historical type of the great 
sacrifice on Calvary. The Jewish high-priest 
was a type of our great High-Priest. The Tem- 
ple and its furniture, and the sacrifices and 
ceremonies of the Jewish worship were nearly 
all typical of facts in the life of the Christian 
church. These types throw great light on the doc- 
trines of Christianity and should be carefully 
studied by every one who would understand its 
real character. It is usually easy to interpret 
types, and no detailed rules are necessary. One 
suggestion should be observed : Not everything 
in the Old Testament which seems to illustrate 
the doctrines of the New Testament is to be re- 



100 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

garded as a type. Only those persons and events 
can be considered types which were divinely ap- 
pointed to foreshadow persons and events in the 
future. 

But all symbols are not easily interpreted, and 
some detailed instruction with regard to them 
will be necessary. Ordinary symbols may be 
divided into those which are real and those 
which were seen only in dreams and visions. It 
was common for the Hebrew prophets to act 
out their predictions. We have an illustration 
of this in the prophecy of Ahijah to Jeroboam 
(1 Kings xi. 28-39) in which the prophet rent 
before the future king his own new mantle, 
tearing it into twelve pieces and giving ten to 
him, thus signifying that the kingdom of Solo- 
mon should be rent and that Jeroboam should 
reign over ten tribes. There is another illustra- 
tion in Isaiah xx., where the Lord commanded 
the prophet : " Go and loose the sack-cloth from 
off thy loins, and put off thy shoe from thy foot. 
And he did so, walking naked and barefoot." 
This was to symbolize the way in which Assyria 
should lead away captives from Egypt and 
Ethiopia and to warn Israel against trusting in 



Interpretation of Figurative Language. 101 

these nations for help. There is another illus- 
tration of it in Acts xxi. 11, where Agabus takes 
the girdle of Paul and binds his own hands and 
feet with it to show that Paul would be arrested 
and bound at Jerusalem. 

Of symbols seen in dreams we have illustra- 
tions in the dream of Joseph (Gen. xxxvi. 5-8) 
in which the sheaves of his brethren "made 
obeisance " to his sheaf ; in Pharaoh's dreams of 
the seven fat and seven lean kine, and of the 
seven thin and seven full ears (Gen. xli. 1-8) ; 
and in Jacob's dream at Bethel (Gen. xxviii. 10- 
22) in which he saw a ladder reaching into 
heaven on which angels ascended and descended. 
In every case except the last the interpretation 
accompanies the narration of the dream. The 
ladder and the angels in Jacob's dream un- 
doubtedly symbolize the fact that the believer 
may have communication with heaven, sending 
up prayers and receiving blessings. 

Symbols that were seen in vision are by far 
the most numerous. A familiar example of 
this is Ezekiel's vision of the valley of dry bones 
(xxxvii. 1-10) to which he was commanded to 
prophesy in order that they might live and be 



102 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

clothed with flesh. The bones represent the 
people of Israel in the deadness of their trans- 
gressions. Isaiah had a vision (chap, vi.) in 
which he saw the Lord " high and lifted up " 
surrounded by worshipping cherubim, himself 
a sinner with polluted lips, and one of the cheru- 
bim flying to touch his lips with a coal from 
off the altar that they might be cleansed. This 
vision symbolized the holiness of God, the sin- 
fulness of man, and our need of cleansing by 
the atonement and by the Holy Spirit's work be- 
fore we are fit for God's service. Another 
vision of this kind is that which Peter had (Acts 
x. 9-1 1) in which he saw a sheet let down from 
heaven containing all kinds of animals which he 
was commanded to kill and eat, not regarding 
any as unclean. He was thus taught to lay 
aside his Jewish prejudices and admit Gentile 
believers to the privileges of the Christian 
church. 

The symbols in the book of Eevelation be- 
long to this class. They were all seen in vision 
and in no case represent objective realities. 
It is a book of symbols and must be so inter- 
preted. 



Interpretation of Figurative Language. 103 

It is needful to say a few words especially on 
the interpretation of symbols. In this the 
student of the Bible will be aided by first de- 
termining whether the symbol was real, or seen 
in a vision or dream. This he can do by con- 
sidering the nature of the subject and the con- 
text. In many cases the fact is stated. Then 
he should be careful not to confuse symbols with 
plain language, and interpret them as though 
they were real description or narrative. This 
mistake has caused much bad interpreting and the 
promulgation of many false theories. Eevela- 
tion has suffered more from this cause than any 
other book of the Bible. The very fact that it 
is a book of symbols should have guarded inter- 
preters from this danger. And in general one 
can tell from the connection whether language 
is symbolical or plain. 

In ascertaining the meaning of a symbol we 
should follow the divine models of interpreta- 
tion. Many symbols of the Bible are inter- 
preted by their authors. A careful study of 
these interpretations will greatly aid the student 
in discovering the true meaning of those which 



104 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

are not interpreted. He will consider only two 
examples beyond those already given. 

In the first part of Kevelation, John sees a 
vision of Christ in the midst of the seven golden 
candlesticks and having seven stars in His right 
hand. The intelligent reader at once perceives 
that all this, even the description of Christ, is 
purely symbolical. Christ does not appear in 
heaven and never has appeared to any one as 
John describes Him, with white hair and flam- 
ing eyes and a sword going out of His mouth. 
Attempt to conceive of such a figure and the 
product is revolting. John has simply indicated 
by this appearance certain qualities and powers 
of Christ. The whiteness of the forehead and 
hair symbolizes purity and glory ; the flaming 
eyes symbolize energy; the two-edged sword 
going out of the mouth symbolizes the power 
of the word He speaks to destroy error. In the 
stars and the candlesticks we see symbols of His 
purpose to give spiritual light. In another vis- 
ion (chap, xxi.), John sees a city let down out of 
heaven, made of pure gold and having walls of 
jasper fifteen hundred miles long and high, and 
twelve gates of pearl, — a city whose light is the 



Interpretation of Figurative Language. 105 

glory of God and the presence of the Lamb, and 
whose people are all holy and peaceful and joy- 
ous. Here again we must remind ourselves 
that all is symbol. There was no such city and 
there never will be in heaven or on earth. By 
this figure John symbolizes the perfection of 
Christ's Kingdom in the earth and in heaven. 
The city is let down out of heaven because that 
is the source of the Kingdom. The gold and 
the precious stones and the divine light symbol- 
ize the glories of that Kingdom, when all things 
shall be made luminous by the truth of God. 
Some of the details of the symbol undoubtedly 
apply only to the heavenly state ; but John's 
main purpose was to set forth the wonderful 
results of God's redemptive work as they will 
appear both on earth and in heaven. Some 
of the symbols of Eevelation we are not able 
to interpret in detail, and a few seem entirely 
beyond our present powers of apprehension ; 
but much light is shed on the book by remem- 
bering that it is made up of a series of symbols 
intended to represent the different steps in the 
progress of Christ's Kingdom. 

As a final word 1 may say : There are a few 



106 The Interpreter with his Bible. 

things in the Bible which even the honest and 
intelligent student cannot understand. But they 
are comparatively unimportant. They do not 
impair the great body of truth which God has 
given us in that book. Without these there is 
enough to make us " wise unto salvation." Let 
us regard these most difficult portions as we do 
the bones which we find in our meat. Let us eat 
the meat and leave the bones. It is folly to 
break our teeth trying to make food of them, 
when we have enough without them. 

Of one thing we may be certain, the more we 
study the Bible with a devout and honest spirit, 
the more we shall be enriched by its wonderful 
treasures. We can never exhaust them. In 
many parts of the Word, new depths of meaning 
will ever lie beyond our best efforts. Unlike 
other books it does not grow stale with repeated 
readings, but ever fresher and fresher, each step 
we take in exploring it opening before us new 
vistas of truth and beauty. O blessed book, 
may we learn to love thee more and more, until 
we shall have gained the heaven to which thou 
hast directed 08, through Jesus Christ who is 
thy central glory ! 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: May 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 



